ehuffnsd said:

But there it's an issue of class. It's true that all the "isms" do overlap to a degree, but surely you can't be arguing that a poor white person is discriminated against because they're white.

Flowers2 said:

How about when some so-called Christian comes against atheism?

meow85 said:

because they are poor.

ehuffnsd said:

Exactly. So their whiteness relates to this, how...?

A poor white person does still have the privilege of being white. If you think that doesn't make a difference in the lower classes, I'd like to invite you to a shelter or soup kitchen to witness how the poor and homeless white people are treated by staff versus how the non-white poor and homeless are treated. I've seen some places where you'd think the white homeless people were royalty compared to the rest.

meow85 said:

just because you aren't aware of it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
Protestant England treated Catholic Ireland very poorly. The Troubles in Northern Ireland were the remmants of that, and the English just made it ok for Catholics to take the throne. Harry Potter is about the classism that exisits in modern day England.

as someone who attended a high school that was 98% white and a private 75% white univeristy i witnessed many occusasions were class and money were used against those who didn't have it.

meow85 said:

I'm not harrassing atheists.. they ALWAYS come to me.. if they don't like my words, then they should leave me and the Christian threads alone ... word edit
[Edited 10/19/08 22:25pm]

Flowers2 said:

questioning why you believe what you believe, espeically what i was questioning you over, isn't the same.

they were all questions i had to ask myself before i changed what i God i called mine.

ehuffnsd said:

who said I was referring to you? lol .. if you took what I said personally, oh well ... I guess only the guilty 'would' feel that way..

Flowers2 said:

i don't defend those atheists that may call your beliefs stupid. however i don't think you get to get off scott free and not come up with the reasons to defend what you believe. you have the same burden of proof as they do.

ehuffnsd said:

if folks ask me why I believe why I do, I tell them.... for me, my experiences of what I've been through in life is why I devote 100% of my belief to Jesus.. cause I wouldn't be alive without Him.. if folks don't want to believe that....well, there's really nothing else to say... this is all an individual journey, you have to experience Jesus for yourself... if you don't want to believe what The Lord has said in His Bible, then who am I?

ehuffnsd said:

But you're crossing the two issues. You started a thread asking about the appropriateness of certain language against white people as a whole, and now you're talking about white-on-white ethnic and class discrimination. I'm sorry, but I'm not following how you made the connection.

Flowers2 said:

I wasn't talking about you specifically, but there have been definite cases on the Org of religious people denigrating and putting down atheists or agnostics. I'm asking, what about that? You can't complain about atheists bashing religious people and not address when it happens in reverse.

meow85 said:

does there have to be a point to everything?

meow85 said:

I didn't say Christians bashing atheists is right, it isn't right.... I'm talking from personal experience, whenever someone starts a Christian thread, here come atheists to start nonsense in the thread, instead of bypassing the thread, they want to start hell.. I even had one literally tell me in the 'angel' thread... that 'all threads are open for discussion' (on what they want ) ... like they can just come and hi-jack the topic (topic was angels) ..and she surely didn't care about the rules of respect, only her agenda.. (even after I told her that her subject was for another thread twice) .. Threadbare started a Christian thread.. and sure enough if a Moderator didn't have to come and snip comments in the thread for the nonsense people did .. and yet some of these same people are crying about 'respect' in the forum ... yeah, ok ..

ehuffnsd said:

In a discussion, generally. I'm sorry, but I don't see how you're connecting the two. No one's arguing that poor whites or whites who are the "wrong" ethnicity don't face discrimination. But it's quite a leap to say it compares to a more visible minority.

meow85 said:

i think i was trying to prove that anytime you degrade someone you take away their humanity. whether it's the group in power or not.

ehuffnsd said:

I still don't see it as the same thing. Because in the cases you're bringing up, it's white versus white. Unless I'm very mistaken, it's not white people who are calling white people cracker or honky, but non-white people -who are still socially lower than even the "lowest" whites.

When poor whites are discriminated against by the rich and middle class whites, they're the minority then, or when the Irish are discriminated against by the English they're the minority then. But those poor whites or those Irish whites are still the majority in the larger social sense of the word.

NoChances said:

This coming from the same person that equated Obama to Hitler. Yeah, you're "credible," 2Jay.

And I've never seen the word "honky" or "cracker" used in P&R.

MuthaFunka said:

i've seen cracker once in pnr and honkie a couple times in music non prince.

ehuffnsd said:

That's pretty damn bold then. And of course it shouldn't be tolerated.

As for the comments about "in-the-news" women being called out of their name, no one seems to have an issue when their male counterparts are called out of their name. It works both ways - you can't against women being called out of their names and not be against men being called out of theirs.

meow85 said:

i strongly disagree. ANY derogatory race-based name-calling should be snipped imo

meow85 said:

unbelievable. i think it's sad that this point has to be defended at ALL. meow, a double standard is at work here. plain and simple.

YOU personally may not feel insulted when you come across hate speech against your [insert race/creed/political affiliation/sexual preference] particular protected category but despite your arguments against 'whites' being offended by such speech, race-based derogatory remarks about an individual or group are offensive

XxAxX said:

And I'm not arguing that it's not, just pointing out that it's really not on the same level.

meow85 said:

as someone who as been called both a fag and a cracker i can tell you both hit with the same weight.

ehuffnsd said:

How, if you don't mind my asking?

I've never known anyone to respond to a name liek cracker, even when it's meant with anger, with anything but indifference.

meow85 said:

the fuck it's not on the same level. check yourself please. perhaps it would help if you were to remember that you do not speak for me, or for the people i know.

and as a matter of fact if you look carefully around the ORG, specifically at P&R, you will see empty chairs where once ORGers sat. these are people who have deleted their accounts because of this ongoing racist, name-calling issue.

and no, i don't see a need to argue this point with you (as you have demanded of ehuff) so i won't waste my time explaining why i dislike seeing derogatory names directed at white people. just take my word for it, hate speech is not appropriate. period.

XxAxX said:

ehuffnsd said:

well, i'm not so sure you should applaud me when i am being pretty snippy but thanks.

and my apologies for swearing, Meow85. it's just.. this topic causes me frustration.

Well, I know for a fact that there has been plenty of racist insults directed towards quite a few African-American orgers in p&r, especially last year everytime we tried to have a decent discussion regarding race, many of us were accused of race-baiting just because we chose to discuss it, and were called other names, and several times told by some orgers who are posting on this very thread, to stop discussing it as it has no place here.. It almost felt like some of us had to rsise our hands to ask permission if we could discuss racism in America. But that was last year....

...and I have to say, since this election, in P&R, I see more people willing to discuss race issues and sort of reach a bit of common ground and share their experiences with other orgers about race; asking questions regarding other cultures, etc. I have even noticed that for the past 2 months, it seems a bit calmer in p&r, aside from debating whose presidential candidate is the best one for the job. It's unfortunate though that it took Barack Obama running for President, for the subject of race to finally be discussed on a slightly, more comfortable basis in P&R without feeling attacked or that you said a taboo word.


Race will never be an easy subject to discuss. Someone will always be offended. The point is if people let others know what terms are considered offensive and disrespectful, then you will see less of it if you educate others to let them know about it. I have to say I enjoy conversing with people in P&R on race/culture/social and political issues. It's not easy at times, but looking at the p&r forum today, compared to last year, I say we've pretty much come a long way. More people are willing to "listen and learn" as oppose to "knowing it all, having a closed mind and refusing to hear others out by taking it personal".

I see a lot less "Dont' talk about race " to more of a "willing to discuss, listen and ask questions about race." I see more people defending those outside of their race, as oppose to only giving a damn when it only concerns a situation concerning theirs. Still got a long way to go, but it's looking pretty good so far. Just my 2 cents, and yes I can't believe I said this either. .


(a few words edited)
[Edited 10/21/08 17:37pm]